>>> I think that technique could do with a crisp name. What do you
>>> folks think about "deferred state update"? Other takers?
>>>> For myself I was referring to this thing as simply "instant
>> feedback".
>> That *is* short but doesn't distinguish the condition from the
> treatment. I've thought of augmenting it to "preserving
> instantaneous feedback" -- alas, it still won't suggest the How.
>> (FYI, "instantaneous" is the right word here -- it suggests short
> time to completion of a process or event, rather than short time
> elapsed between an event and its consequent which "instant"
> connotes.)
Well, my English is far from perfect, thanks for correcting me.
In regards to distinguishing the condition from the treatment, I don't know
if it's really necessary. At least ATM I don't know any other technique
which would be an equally intuitive treatment of the problem (if you
artificially add a unit delay into the loop, you don't really solve the
problem, you rather eliminate it). I mean, if you do have "instantaneous
feedback", then you cannot immediately (that is until solving the feedback
equation) update the state anyway, as you don't know the new values. In that
respect there is nothing to be artificially deferred. Therefore how about
simply referring to it as an "instantaneous feedback", whereas *the* method
maybe doesn't need any specific name, and is implicitly understood?
What do you also think about "instantaneously unstable" (or is it instable?)
term then?
Regards,
Vadim
--
Vadim Zavalishin
Senior Software Developer | R&D
Tel +49-30-611035-0
Fax +49-30-611035-2600
NATIVE INSTRUMENTS GmbH
Schlesische Str. 28
10997 Berlin, Germany
http://www.native-instruments.com
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg
Registernummer: HRB 72458
UST.-ID.-Nr. DE 20 374 7747
Geschaeftsfuehrung: Daniel Haver (CEO), Mate Galic